Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Making Fakes? Post Them Here!
User avatar
Zoe Mal Doran
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:34 pm

Re: Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Postby Zoe Mal Doran » Sun May 10, 2009 12:54 am

Hey, if you want me as your damsel in distress, Madmax, you can put me in pretty much any peril you like ;)
This certainly seems to be packed full of jam... and quicksand. Oh dear.

User avatar
redjak6t4
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:09 pm

Re: Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Postby redjak6t4 » Tue May 12, 2009 10:54 pm

Zoe Mal Doran wrote:Separate plastic bag sounds kinda scary, but it could work.
Full-body mummification coverage except for nostrils (so I can still breathe until I go under, it's no fun if I pass out or suffocate too early :P ) and if the covering is opaque, leave my boobs uncovered for your viewing pleasure. Being unable to move and totally doomed without heroic intervention. Yep, pretty much covers my damsel in distress fantasy. :)


Hello again Zoe!

Yes, bagging helplessly bound and gagged damsels is something I do in my QS fakes, just to up the ante. The idea being that if the gal is too busy trying to breathe she won't be inhaling enough air to try and scream thru her gag - thus she's well and truly silenced.

As you say, premature asphyxiation is undesirable because you want to enjoy your sink all the way until the mud closes over your face, right?

Talking about enjoyment for a moment, my ex-cyber friend Brandy told me that she found herself caught in a bit of a dilemma when it came to d.i.d fantasy sinking. One the one hand (like yourself) she wanted to be wrapped up and/or tightly bound so that she was totally helpless, yet on the other hand, she also nurtured the contradictory desire to keep her hands free so that she could pleasure herself as she sank.

Have these contrary urges occurred in your sinking fantasies?

Thanks,

Redjak6t4.

User avatar
MadMax359
Posts: 4214
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 5:07 am
Location: north carolina

Re: Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Postby MadMax359 » Wed May 13, 2009 11:17 am

Zoe Mal Doran wrote:Hey, if you want me as your damsel in distress, Madmax, you can put me in pretty much any peril you like ;)


i'm sure we can work something out!! :twisted:
The strong do what they want, the weak do what they must

User avatar
Zoe Mal Doran
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:34 pm

Re: Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Postby Zoe Mal Doran » Thu May 14, 2009 11:17 pm

Hmm.
Why not bind/wrap her in such a way that one hand is on one of her boobs, the other is at her pussy, and there is only enough give in the bindings/wrappings for her to pleasure herself but not to escape or do anything else?
Not sure how feasible that would be.
This certainly seems to be packed full of jam... and quicksand. Oh dear.

User avatar
redjak6t4
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:09 pm

Re: Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Postby redjak6t4 » Fri May 15, 2009 1:21 pm

Hi Zoe!

Hmmm....thinks for a while about different ways to bind/wrap women.

Ok, being a long-time bondage aficionado I've picked up a few snippets of info about the pro's and con's of various bondage positions. First off, the dominant men/women who do the binding/wrapping usually like to see their subs tied with their arms behind their backs. This position (particularly if the elbows are touching) emphasizes the breasts and leaves them available for play by the dom/domme. ;) There's a double catch with this pose though. Firstly, not all women can make their elbows meet behind their backs.

Secondly, binding someone with rope is considerably quicker than doing it with tape, as you would in a neck-to-toe mummification. Therefore there are more mummy pics on the 'Net showing models with their arms wrapped to their sides or held loosely behind their backs - crossed at the wrists, for example. It's simply too much of strain for most models to have their arms secured behind their backs (elbows together) for the length of time it takes for them to be properly mummified and gagged and then pose for a photo-session.

Of course, an arms-behind-the-back pose doesn't help you out at all, does it?

So I suggest that you forgo paying any attention to your boobs and settle for both hands wrapped or tied in front of you, nestled in your groin area. This way you get to control your pleasuring and your arms can still be effectively secured to your torso with tape or rope. Sound good?

The only downside is that any observers of your mock-peril (Max? :shock: Me? :shock: ) will see less of your breasts than they might otherwise like. Yes, it's a compromise, but not such a bad one, I think you'll agree.

Any thoughts?

Redjak6t4.

User avatar
MadMax359
Posts: 4214
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 5:07 am
Location: north carolina

Re: Elaine's Chances of Avoiding Death in the Mire - 0 %

Postby MadMax359 » Fri May 15, 2009 10:16 pm

lol no, as i understand your suggestion, with Zoe's arms in front of her and her hands down by her groin, we'll see more of the breasts... her arms will push into her chest and create some delightful cleavage, all we have to do is do the mummification wrap above and below her boobs, which will emphasize them even more.... :twisted:
The strong do what they want, the weak do what they must


Return to “Manipulations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest